~ Free Thinker.

WHY NATO ?

Is NATO a nuclear-armed alliance that since the end of the Cold War has been in search of a mission.

This might seem like an innocent question.

However we are now faces a world marked by accelerating change, in which everyone is connected but nobody is in charge.

The end of the Cold War, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, and the collapse of the Soviet Union led the Allies to establish the North Atlantic Cooperation Council in 1991 and the Partnership for Peace in 1994.

Since then the Alliance has been unable to formulate a concerted strategy of engagement with other international organizations owing in large part to disagreements among the NATO Allies. Intractable obstacles to cooperation rooted in national policies have generally been surmounted only under the compulsion of events like now.

This situation cannot be expected to change owing to their perceptions of the Alliance as a Cold War military organization composed of wealthy “northern” countries and dominated by the United States. It may be impossible to depoliticize firmly held national differences or to avoid stalemate.

According to the UN Charter, the UN Security Council has, primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. But as we all know it is an organisation now paralyzed by lack of funds, handcuffed by its permanent members, turned into a gossip shop for its 192 members and god knows how many attracted specialized Agencies.

So knowing that NATO is primarily composed of American muscle, is Putin correctly reading their signals not to do anything of great significance.

The strategy of “kicking Putin in the cronies” is not causing many Russians to reach for the vodka bottle so far.

NATO in its recent meeting agreed in principle to a rapid reaction force and agree to reverse the trend of declining defense budgets and aim to increase defense expenditure in real terms as GDP grows; ” we will direct our defense budgets as efficiently and effectively as possible; we will aim to move towards the existing NATO guideline of spending 2% of GDP on defense within a decade.” Wow !

The Crimea crisis reveals the complete failure of NATO, the EU and Russia to find a path toward defense and security cooperation in the post-Cold War era.

IS’s successive victories in northern Iraq and their unchecked brutality continue to draw fighters to their ranks from throughout the Middle East, as well as from Western countries like Britain and the U.S.

There is no longer a clear enemy.

The overstepping of any mandate received by NATO may have a negative effect on the credibility of the responsibility to protect in future gross human rights violations.

There is no doubt that prior to Russia’s annexation of Crimea the Wales Summit would have been little more than a glorified photo-op.

It appears reactive, a kind of military tit-for-tat, that in the long run does nothing to reverse Ukraine’s dismemberment.

NATO remains a self destructing nuclear-armed alliance in which all states must accept the principle of nuclear deterrence and being part of the NATO nuclear command and control system.

In light of this the Alliance poses no threat to any country is blowing hot and cold air, “should the security of any Ally be threatened we will act together and decisively. ”

What it is doing is helping the creation of the Islamic State on NATO’s strategic doorstep and the steady march of the Islamist anti-state, Iran and its nuclear ambitions will continue. It was not just a question of changing weapons, but also changing bureaucracies.

NATO has to work out how it needs to be restructured for the current world.

Nations today use computer network operations to defend sovereignty
and to project power, and cyber conflicts may soon become the rule rather than
the exception. Cyber security will require an international solution.

With Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the rapid rise of strategic China, proliferation of destructive technologies across the world and a range of other potential threats it is clear that such self-deluding dogma of NATO must be challenged.

International relations in cyberspace seem closer to Pandemonium than Paradise. European Union and NATO, as the largest and most cohesive political and military alliances in the world, might be the best places to start.

Perhaps bring back the notation of a new European peace force would fit into NATO’S command structure and not the other way around.

At least the image could reflect Peace rather than seeing world leaders on a golf course craning their necks to watch Fighter jets surrounded by Military vehicles.

The US invests roughly €76,000 per soldier per annum, Europeans on average invest only €18,000.

The Disillusionment that we have some privileged position on Earth are challenged by such Alliances.